Partner Visa Sponsor Contributory Parent Limitation Waiver

A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver is the only way to have a partner sponsorship approved within five years of the sponsor's permanent Contributory Parent visa grant when the couple were already together at that time. The partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver comes from regulation 1.20KA(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994, and it turns on one narrow question: why did the partner not migrate with the sponsor in the first place?

This guide is written for the Australian sponsor. It explains what the partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver requires, why reasons about money are excluded, which reasons Department policy accepts as capable of being compelling, how to prove both the original reason and the change in circumstances since, how a submission is structured, and what to do if the sponsorship is refused. The commercial page on partner visa sponsorship limitations explains how this limitation fits with the other sponsor rules, and the hub article on when a sponsor cannot sponsor a partner visa in Australia sets out every limitation side by side. For the sponsor's role in general, see the guide to what the Australian partner must do as a partner visa sponsor, and for every pathway, the complete guide to partner visas in Australia.

The point most people miss is simple. A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver is not a general hardship waiver. It is a question about history. The sponsor must explain, with documents, a real and non-financial reason why the partner stayed behind or withdrew from the Contributory Parent application, and then show what has changed.

What is the partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver?

The partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver is the exception in regulation 1.20KA(3) that switches off the five year sponsorship limitation in regulation 1.20KA for a sponsor who holds a permanent Contributory Parent visa.

Regulation 1.20KA was inserted into the Migration Regulations with effect from 1 July 2009. It applies to applications made on or after that date for the Subclass 309 partner visa, the Subclass 820 partner visa and the Subclass 300 prospective marriage visa. Under the Department of Home Affairs procedural instruction on sponsorship limitations, the regulation prevents a person from sponsoring a partner or fiance for five years from the day the person was granted a permanent Contributory Parent visa, if:

• the person was granted the permanent Contributory Parent visa, Subclass 143 or Subclass 864, on or after 1 July 2009; and
• the person was in a spouse or de facto relationship with the person now being sponsored on or before the date that permanent Contributory Parent visa was granted.

Regulation 1.20KA(3) then provides that the limitation does not apply where there were compelling reasons, other than reasons related to financial circumstances, for not applying for the Contributory Parent visa at the same time as the proposed sponsor, or for applying at the same time but withdrawing the application.

So a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver case always has three building blocks. The sponsor holds a permanent Contributory Parent visa granted on or after 1 July 2009. The couple were already married or in a de facto relationship on or before that grant. And less than five years have passed since the grant. If any one of those blocks is missing, the limitation is not engaged at all and no waiver is needed. The guide to who can sponsor a partner visa explains the basic sponsor eligibility rules that apply before any limitation is considered.

Does the waiver apply to the five year period from grant or from application?

The five year period under regulation 1.20KA runs from the day the sponsor's permanent Contributory Parent visa was granted. This is different from regulation 1.20J, where the five year periods run from the date an earlier partner visa application was made. In a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver matter, the grant date on the sponsor's Subclass 143 or Subclass 864 grant notice is therefore the starting point for every calculation.

Why does regulation 1.20KA exist?

Regulation 1.20KA exists to stop "split visa applications", where one partner migrated on a Contributory Parent visa and the other was later sponsored as a partner to avoid the costs of migrating as a Contributory Parent secondary applicant.

Department policy explains the history. After the Contributory Parent visa category was introduced in 2003, a practice developed. One member of a married or de facto couple applied for a Contributory Parent visa and claimed that their partner was not migrating. Once the applicant became a permanent resident, they sponsored their partner under the partner visa provisions.

According to the procedural instruction, the split saved the couple a substantial amount of money in two ways:

• the couple did not pay the second instalment of the visa application charge for the partner as a secondary applicant on the Contributory Parent application; and
• the couple avoided lodging the higher assurance of support bond with Centrelink that applies to each secondary applicant, and the partner avoided the 10 year assurance of support period during which certain Centrelink payments can be deducted from the bond.

A split visa application was not prohibited until regulation 1.20KA started on 1 July 2009. Policy describes the practice as contrary to the intention of the Contributory Parent category, which is that migrating parents contribute more fully to their future health and welfare costs through the second instalment and the assurance of support bond.

This background explains the whole shape of the partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver. The regulation targets couples who separated their migration for financial advantage. The exception is for couples who separated their migration for a different, compelling reason. That is why financial reasons are written out of regulation 1.20KA(3) in express terms, and why decision makers are told to keep the purpose of the limitation in mind when deciding whether to approve the sponsorship.

The procedural instruction also records that regulation 1.20KA discourages split visa applications but still enables applicants to apply for a partner or prospective marriage visa in certain circumstances. The partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver is one of those circumstances. The other is simply the passing of five years from the grant.

Who needs a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver?

A sponsor needs a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver only if all the elements of regulation 1.20KA are met and the five year period will not have ended by the time the sponsorship is decided.

The waiver is relevant to a sponsor who:

• holds a permanent Contributory Parent visa, Subclass 143 (granted outside Australia) or Subclass 864 (the Contributory Aged Parent visa, granted in Australia);
• was granted that visa on or after 1 July 2009;
• was married to, or in a de facto relationship with, the partner on or before the grant date; and
• now wants to sponsor that same partner, or a fiance, for a Subclass 309, Subclass 820 or Subclass 300 visa within five years of that grant.

The waiver is not needed where the relationship with the current partner started after the Contributory Parent visa was granted. In that situation the couple did not split their migration, because there was no relationship to split. It is also not needed where the sponsor's visa is a parent visa that is not a Contributory Parent visa, or where the sponsor holds only a temporary Contributory Parent visa. Those situations should be checked carefully against the documents, because the label on the grant notice matters. The article on partner visa sponsor eligibility and the guide for a permanent resident partner visa sponsor explain the residence status every sponsor needs.

Many sponsors in this position are older Australians who migrated to join adult children. Age does not affect the limitation, but it often affects the facts behind a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver, such as illness, care duties and the sponsor's ties to children and grandchildren in Australia. The guide to partner visa sponsor age requirements explains the general age rules.

What if the sponsor has since become an Australian citizen?

Becoming an Australian citizen does not remove the regulation 1.20KA limitation. The limitation is tied to the grant of the permanent Contributory Parent visa and the five years that follow it, not to the sponsor's current status. A sponsor who has taken citizenship within the five years still needs a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver if the other elements are met. The article on a partner visa sponsor who recently became a citizen explains other citizenship timing issues.

What does regulation 1.20KA(3) actually require?

Regulation 1.20KA(3) requires compelling reasons, other than reasons related to financial circumstances, for the partner either not applying for the Contributory Parent visa at the same time as the sponsor, or applying at the same time and then withdrawing.

Each part of that sentence does real work in a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver submission. It is worth taking them one at a time.

Compelling reasons

The word "compelling" is not defined in the legislation. Department policy says its ordinary dictionary meaning applies. In practice, a compelling reason is one that is forceful and convincing, not merely understandable or convenient. Policy also says that every aspect of the sponsor's and the partner's circumstances is relevant to whether compelling reasons exist, and that these applications should be supported by strong documentary evidence.

The procedural instruction describes regulation 1.20KA(3) as allowing officers to approve a sponsorship that would otherwise fail regulation 1.20KA if there are compelling reasons affecting the sponsor or their partner. This is broader than the regulation 1.20J waiver, which is limited to compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor. In a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver case, the partner's own circumstances at the time of the Contributory Parent application are often the heart of the matter.

Other than reasons related to financial circumstances

The exception expressly excludes reasons related to financial circumstances. This is not a matter of weight or discretion. A reason that is, in substance, about money cannot satisfy regulation 1.20KA(3), however genuine it is. A sponsor cannot obtain a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver by showing that the couple could not afford the second instalment for two people, or wanted to keep money for living costs.

Not applying at the same time, or applying and withdrawing

The exception covers two histories. In the first, the partner never applied with the sponsor, so only one partner was in the Contributory Parent application. In the second, both applied together but the partner later withdrew from the application. The submission must identify which history applies and give the reason that drove it, at the time it happened.

What has changed since

Department policy adds a practical expectation. Where the partner could not migrate with the sponsor because of a major family illness or another significant non-financial obligation, it is reasonable to expect evidence of a change in circumstances that now allows the partner to apply for the partner or prospective marriage visa. A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver submission that proves the original reason but says nothing about what has changed leaves an obvious gap.

How is the partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver different from the regulation 1.20J waiver?

The partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver looks backwards at why the couple did not migrate together, while the regulation 1.20J waiver looks at compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor now.

This is the single most important distinction in this area, and it is often blurred. Regulation 1.20J limits sponsors who have sponsored partners before, or who were sponsored themselves. Its waiver in regulation 1.20J(2) allows approval where there are compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor. Department policy for that waiver lists factors such as a dependent child of both partners, the death of a previous partner, a longstanding new relationship, the hardship the sponsor would suffer and the sponsor's ties to Australia.

Regulation 1.20KA(3) is drafted differently. The question is whether there were compelling, non-financial reasons for the partner not applying at the same time as the sponsor, or for withdrawing. The focus is the decision the couple made when the Contributory Parent application was lodged or while it was being processed. Present hardship is relevant background, and policy says every aspect of the couple's circumstances is relevant, but present hardship alone does not answer the question the regulation asks.

Consider a sponsor who explains that living apart from the partner for three years has been lonely and has affected the sponsor's health. That is real and should be described. But if the submission does not explain why the partner did not migrate with the sponsor at the start, it has not addressed regulation 1.20KA(3) at all. A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver argued like a regulation 1.20J hardship waiver is a common and avoidable weakness.

The two limitations can also apply to the same sponsor. A Contributory Parent visa holder who was previously sponsored as a partner, or who has sponsored a partner before, may need to deal with both regulations. Each limitation has its own test, and meeting one does not satisfy the other. The FAQ on whether a person can sponsor more than one partner and the answer on sponsoring a partner after being sponsored on a partner visa explain the regulation 1.20J rules.

It is also different from the "compelling and compassionate circumstances" tests that appear elsewhere in partner visa law, such as the Schedule 3 waiver for onshore applicants. Those tests have their own wording and case law. The guides on partner visa compelling and compassionate circumstances and what compelling and compassionate circumstances mean for a partner visa explain those other tests, which should not be copied into a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver submission without adapting them to regulation 1.20KA(3).

What reasons can support a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver?

Department policy recognises that a major family illness or other significant non-financial obligation that prevented the partner migrating with the sponsor can amount to compelling reasons, and it gives two further situations where policy would support a waiver.

Policy is careful to say that no definitive list can be given. The examples below are therefore starting points, not limits. Every partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver must be built on the couple's own facts.

A major family illness

The first policy example is a partner who was unable to migrate with the sponsor because of a major family illness. Consider a hypothetical couple where the sponsor applied for a Subclass 143 visa to join their adult children in Australia, while the partner stayed in the home country to care for a parent with advanced dementia who had no other carer. The reason for staying behind was care, not cost. If that parent has since died, or care has passed to another family member, the change in circumstances is clear.

The evidence for this type of partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver normally includes medical records for the ill family member, evidence of the partner's caring role, evidence that no one else could provide the care at the time, and evidence of what has since changed, such as a death certificate or a care arrangement document.

Other significant non-financial obligations

The second policy example is broader: other significant obligations, other than financially related obligations, that prevented the partner migrating at the same time. What qualifies will depend on the facts. Possible examples include care of a dependent child or grandchild who could not travel, an obligation arising from a court process in the home country, or responsibilities for a family member with a disability.

The word "significant" matters. A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver will not be approved because the partner preferred to stay, wanted to finish a hobby or project, or found it inconvenient to move. Equally, an obligation that is really about money, such as keeping a job or running a business for income, is likely to be characterised as financial and excluded. Where an obligation has both financial and non-financial aspects, the submission must show honestly why the non-financial aspect was the real reason.

Same-sex de facto couples in a relationship before 1 July 2009

Department policy supports a waiver for same-sex de facto partners who were in a relationship before 1 July 2009 and were unable to include or sponsor their same-sex partner at that time. Policy explains that amendments made on 1 July 2009 enabled applicants to include a same-sex de facto partner in their visa application as a member of the family unit.

For these couples, the reason the partner was not included was the law itself, not money. A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver on this ground should document the relationship's start date, its continuation, and the dates of the Contributory Parent application and grant. The firm's page on LGBTI partner visas and the answer on same-sex marriage and the spouse visa explain how same-sex relationships are now assessed.

Bridging visa holders who could not add the partner

Department policy also supports a waiver for bridging visa holders who last held a temporary Contributory Parent visa (Subclass 173 or Subclass 884), made their permanent Contributory Parent application (Subclass 143 or Subclass 864) before 1 July 2009, and were unable to add their partner to that permanent application.

This is a technical category. It applies to people caught by the two-step temporary and permanent Contributory Parent structure at the time the regulation started. A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver on this ground depends on the sponsor's visa history and application dates, which should be confirmed from the sponsor's own records or the Department's file. The guide to bridging visas in Australia explains how bridging visas work generally.

Why do cost-saving reasons fail?

Cost-saving reasons fail because regulation 1.20KA(3) expressly excludes reasons related to financial circumstances, and because saving the Contributory Parent costs is the exact practice the regulation was made to stop.

This is the hardest message for many sponsors. Some couples made the split decision because they could not afford the second instalment for two people. That may be true and may have been a painful choice. But the regulation does not allow a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver for that reason. The exclusion is in the regulation itself, not in policy, so a decision maker has no room to treat affordability as compelling.

Reasons that are likely to be characterised as financial include:

• the cost of the second instalment of the visa application charge for the partner;
• the cost or difficulty of lodging the assurance of support bond;
• the partner keeping a job, business or pension income in the home country;
• the partner staying to sell property or wind up financial affairs; and
• a plan to apply for the partner later because it was cheaper.

Some of these reasons can have non-financial elements. A partner who stayed to manage a family business might also have been the only person caring for an ill relative. In that kind of partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver, the submission must separate the financial and non-financial parts honestly and show, with evidence, that the non-financial reason was the real driver. Overstating the non-financial reason risks credibility findings.

Honesty matters for another reason. The partner visa application must not contain false or misleading information. Public interest criterion 4020 can lead to refusal where false or misleading information or bogus documents are given. The guides on partner visa PIC 4020 risks and on an honest mistake compared with PIC 4020 explain the risk. An explanation for the split that is later contradicted by the sponsor's own Contributory Parent file can do far more harm than a frank admission that the limitation applies.

What evidence does a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver need?

A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver needs evidence of three things: the non-financial reason at the time, the change in circumstances since, and a genuine and continuing relationship throughout.

Department policy says these applications should be supported by strong documentary evidence. In practice, a submission built only on the couple's statements is unlikely to persuade.

Evidence of the original reason

The first group of evidence proves why the partner did not apply with the sponsor, or withdrew. Depending on the facts, it may include:

• medical records, hospital letters and specialist reports for an ill family member;
• documents showing the partner's caring role, such as care plans, letters from doctors or social workers, or carer registrations in the home country;
• court documents, guardianship orders or official records for a legal or family obligation;
• relationship records showing the start date for a same-sex de facto couple before 1 July 2009; and
• the sponsor's Contributory Parent application and grant documents, including any withdrawal request and the date it was made.

Documents in another language need accurate English translations. The guide to partner visa evidence translation explains what the Department expects. Where documents are missing, the guide to partner visa missing documents explains how gaps can be explained.

Evidence of the change in circumstances

The second group proves what has changed so that the partner can now migrate. This could be a death certificate, evidence that care has passed to another family member, evidence that the ill relative now lives in residential care, the end of a court process, or another document showing that the obligation has ended. A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver that proves only the past reason invites the question: if the reason still exists, why is the partner applying now?

Evidence that the relationship continued

The third group proves the relationship itself. The partner visa will only be granted if the couple meet the relationship criteria, and a period of living apart while one partner migrated must be explained. The four areas of evidence are financial aspects, the nature of the household, social aspects and the nature of the commitment. The complete guide to partner visa relationship evidence and the article on the genuine and continuing relationship test explain what is assessed.

For couples who lived in different countries for some years, the guides on partner visa temporary separation and long-distance relationships explain how contact, visits and financial support are presented. Form 888 statements from people who know the couple, such as adult children and long-standing friends, are often valuable. The guide to Form 888 witness statements and the answer on who can sign a Form 888 explain the requirements.

Statements from the sponsor and the partner

Both the sponsor and the partner should give detailed statements. The statements should explain the decision not to migrate together, who made it, when it was made, what alternatives were considered, and why money was not the reason. They should be consistent with each other and with every document on the Department's file. The guide on writing a partner visa relationship statement explains the general approach, and in a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver case those statements must also address regulation 1.20KA(3) directly.

How does the Department find out about the Contributory Parent visa?

The Department checks its own records for every partner sponsorship, so a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver issue will be identified whether or not the sponsor mentions it.

Department policy tells officers to check the partner visa application to establish whether the sponsor has previously been granted a permanent Subclass 143 or Subclass 864 visa. It then says that, regardless of whether this information has been provided in the partner visa application, officers should check the Department's systems to establish whether the sponsor was granted a Contributory Parent visa on or after 1 July 2009.

This has two practical consequences. First, there is no advantage in staying silent. The sponsor's visa history is already on the Department's file. Second, the Department can compare what the sponsor says now with what was said in the Contributory Parent application, including any statement that the partner was not migrating. A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver submission must therefore be prepared with the earlier file in mind.

A sponsor who no longer has copies of the Contributory Parent application can request the file from the Department. The guide to a partner visa FOI request explains how to obtain the Department's records. The sponsor's own documents are covered in the guide to partner visa sponsor documents and the answer on what documents a sponsor needs to provide.

The sponsorship itself is lodged online after the visa application. The guides to partner visa sponsorship lodgement and Form 40SP explain the process. The sponsorship form asks about the sponsor's history, and the answers should be complete and accurate.

How is a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver submission structured?

A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver submission should identify the limitation, accept the facts that engage it, and then prove each part of regulation 1.20KA(3) with indexed evidence.

There is no Department form for this waiver. It is made in writing, usually as a legal submission supported by statements and documents uploaded to the visa application in ImmiAccount. A clear structure helps the decision maker find every element quickly. A typical structure is:

• Introduction. The sponsor, the applicant, the visa subclass and the request that the sponsorship be approved under regulation 1.20KA(3).
• The facts that engage regulation 1.20KA. The sponsor's Subclass 143 or Subclass 864 grant date, the start date of the relationship, and the date the five years will end. Accepting these facts candidly builds credibility.
• The history of the Contributory Parent application. When it was lodged, who was included, whether the partner withdrew and when, and what the application said about the partner.
• The compelling reason. A precise account of the non-financial reason, supported by the evidence index.
• Why the reason was not financial. A direct answer to the exclusion in regulation 1.20KA(3), including any financial aspects that existed and why they were not the reason.
• The change in circumstances. What has changed and when, with evidence.
• The relationship. A summary of the genuine and continuing relationship, including how contact was kept during the period apart.
• Other relevant circumstances. Policy says every aspect of the sponsor's and partner's circumstances is relevant. This is where present hardship, health, family in Australia and ties to Australia belong.
• Conclusion and evidence index.

The submission should be written for a decision maker who has never met the couple and who is reading it alongside the Department's earlier Contributory Parent file. The guide to partner visa appeal submissions explains how legal submissions are structured more generally, and the guide to partner visa evidence organisation explains how to index documents.

When should the partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver be raised?

The partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver should be raised at lodgement, with the full evidence, rather than waiting for the Department to identify the limitation.

The sponsorship is decided as part of the visa decision. It is a time of decision criterion for the Subclass 820, Subclass 309 and Subclass 300 visas, and there is no separate decision sent to the sponsor. The guides on partner visa sponsorship approval and the partner visa sponsorship assessment explain how this works. A refused sponsorship means a refused visa.

Raising the waiver early has three advantages. The decision maker reads the explanation before forming a view. The evidence is on the file if the case is later reviewed. And the couple avoid the pressure of answering a request under a short deadline. The guide to a partner visa sponsor risk assessment before lodgement explains how sponsor issues are identified before the application is made, and the guide to a partner visa application review before lodgement explains a broader file check.

If the waiver was not raised at lodgement, the Department may ask for information under section 56 or put adverse information to the applicant under section 57 of the Migration Act 1958. Section 57 generally requires the Department to give the applicant particulars of relevant information that would be the reason, or part of the reason, for refusal and to invite comment. The guides on the section 57 natural justice letter and how to respond to a section 57 letter explain the process. A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver prepared in a hurry in response to a section 57 letter is rarely as strong as one prepared before lodgement.

Should the couple wait for the five years to pass instead?

Waiting for the five years to pass can remove the need for a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver, because the limitation runs for five years from the grant of the permanent Contributory Parent visa.

Sponsorship approval is assessed at the time of decision. A limitation that applies when the application is lodged may therefore have ended by the time the sponsorship is decided, depending on processing times. The Administrative Review Tribunal decision in Rahman (Migration) [2020] AATA 3380, a Subclass 309 matter, was remitted to the Department, and the reported issues were that the sponsorship remains in force and that five years had lapsed from the grant of a permanent Contributory Parent visa. That issue description shows that the passing of the five year period during a case can matter.

Whether to wait or lodge now is a strategic decision that depends on several factors:

• how far away the end of the five year period is;
• whether the applicant is in Australia and has a visa that allows an onshore application, or is outside Australia;
• current partner visa processing times, which are not guaranteed;
• whether a genuine partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver ground exists, so that the sponsorship can be approved even if the period has not ended; and
• the cost of the application. The Department lists the partner visa application charge from AUD 11,710. The guide to partner visa cost explains the government charges.

Lodging with no waiver ground and simply hoping processing takes longer than the remaining period is a risk. If the Department decides the application before the five years end, and no partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver ground is made out, the visa will be refused. For onshore applicants, the guide to onshore partner visas explains the visa status issues. For applicants outside Australia, the guide to offshore partner visas explains the Subclass 309 pathway.

What happens if the partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver is refused?

If the partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver is not accepted, the sponsorship is not approved and the partner visa is refused, but the refusal can be reviewed by the Administrative Review Tribunal.

The refusal decision should be read closely. It will usually explain why the decision maker found that regulation 1.20KA applied and why the reasons given were not compelling or were considered financial. The guide to understanding a partner visa refusal letter and the answer on what happens if the partner's sponsorship is refused explain the next steps.

The review deadline and who lodges

The application for review must be lodged within 28 days after the day the applicant is notified of the decision, or within 7 days if the applicant is in immigration detention. The deadline cannot be extended. For a Subclass 820 refusal and a Subclass 309 refusal, the visa applicant lodges the review. For a Subclass 300 refusal, the sponsor lodges. The guides on the partner visa appeal deadline and who can lodge a partner visa appeal explain these rules. The firm's urgent ART visa refusal application service assists where the deadline is close.

The Tribunal fee

The Tribunal fee for a migration review is $3,727 for fees paid on or after 1 July 2026. A 50% reduction may be available for financial hardship, and 50% of the fee is refunded if the decision is set aside or remitted. The guide to partner visa ART fees and the answer on Tribunal review cost and fee reduction explain this.

What the Tribunal considers

The Tribunal reviews the decision on the law and facts at the time of its own decision. It can consider new evidence about the reasons for the split and the change in circumstances. If the five year period ends while the review is pending, the Tribunal can take that into account. In Ly (Migration) [2022] AATA 409, a Subclass 820 matter, the decision was remitted to the Department, and the reported issues were the time limit prior to sponsorship, that the sponsor was a Contributory Parent visa holder, and that the parties re-married in Australia. The guides to the partner visa ART review process, partner visa ART evidence and preparing for a partner visa ART hearing explain the process. The answer on how to challenge a refusal involving sponsorship limitations is a short summary.

An onshore Subclass 820 applicant who holds a Bridging visa A connected to the partner visa application generally keeps that bridging visa while a valid review is pending. The guide to a bridging visa after a partner visa refusal explains how long the applicant can stay. Some couples consider a fresh application instead of review. The guide to partner visa appeal compared with reapplication explains how to choose, and the firm's page on partner visa refusals explains how refusals are handled.

Common mistakes in a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver case

The most common mistakes in a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver case are arguing present hardship instead of the original reason, relying on financial reasons, and giving an account that conflicts with the Contributory Parent file.

Other mistakes seen in this area include:

• Not checking the grant date. The five years run from the grant of the permanent Contributory Parent visa, not from the application or from arrival in Australia.
• Not checking the relationship start date. If the relationship began after the grant, regulation 1.20KA does not apply at all.
• Treating citizenship as a solution. Citizenship does not remove the limitation.
• Saying nothing about what changed. Policy expects evidence of the change in circumstances that now allows the partner to apply.
• Thin evidence. Policy expects strong documentary evidence. Statements alone are rarely enough.
• Ignoring other limitations. A sponsor may also be affected by regulation 1.20J or by the sponsor character provisions in regulations 1.20KB and 1.20KC. The guide to partner visa sponsor relevant offences under regulation 1.20KC explains the character rules.
• Missing the review deadline. A refusal must be acted on within 28 days, or 7 days in detention.

A partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver is a specialised area, and the guides on complex partner visa applications and what makes a partner visa complex explain why sponsor limitation cases need careful preparation.

How My Migration Lawyers helps with a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver

My Migration Lawyers prepares and argues partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver cases for Australian sponsors who hold a Contributory Parent visa and want their partner to join them. The firm deals with complex sponsorship limitation cases, acts in many matters of this exact type, and is capable of handling the case from the first assessment through to Tribunal review.

The work in a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver matter typically includes:

• confirming from the documents whether regulation 1.20KA applies, including the grant date, the relationship start date and the date the five years end;
• obtaining and reading the sponsor's Contributory Parent file so that the waiver is consistent with what the Department already holds;
• identifying whether a genuine non-financial reason exists, and advising frankly where it does not;
• advising on timing, including whether waiting for the five years to pass is the better course;
• preparing the sponsor's and partner's statements, Form 888 statements and the legal submission under regulation 1.20KA(3);
• responding to section 56 requests and section 57 letters; and
• lodging and conducting an Administrative Review Tribunal review if the sponsorship is refused.

The firm's partner visa lawyers work with sponsors across Australia and overseas by video. The guide to complex partner visa lawyer work and the answer on whether there is a partner visa lawyer for complex cases describe the approach, and sponsorship limitation matters are supervised by Weiwei Zhang, Principal Lawyer. The page on what to expect from a partner visa lawyer consultation explains the first meeting, and more answers are in the partner visa questions centre.

If you hold a Contributory Parent visa and want to sponsor your partner, or if a partner visa sponsor contributory parent waiver has already been refused, Book a Consultation with My Migration Lawyers, or call 1300 040 300.